- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:15:54 -0400
- To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
- Cc: public-swd-wg@w3.org
The minutes of today's RDF-in-XHTML Task Force meeting are now
available as
http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html
A text snapshot follows.
----
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
RDF in XHTML Task Force
04 Jun 2009
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jun/0010.html
See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2009-05-28
[3] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-irc
[4] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html
Attendees
Present
Shane McCarron, Manu Sporny, Sam Ruby, Ralph Swick
Regrets
Ben Adida, Michael Hausenblas, Mark Birbeck
Chair
Manu
Scribe
Ralph, Manu
Contents
* Topics
1. Action Review
2. issue-214
3. Copyright for W3C Test Suites
4. Discussion order for HTML+RDFa issues
5. Start "Target of RDFa Processing Rules" discussion
* Summary of Action Items
_____________________________________________________
Action Review
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ben to author wiki page with charter template
for RDFa IG. Manu to provide support where needed. [recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10]
[12] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10
<msporny> [13]http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-ig-charter
[13] http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-ig-charter
ACTION: [DONE] Manu to go through and categorize issues and
requirements that we should address going forward. [recorded in
[14]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
[14] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
<msporny>
[15]http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues#RDFa_Task_Force_Discus
sion_Order
[15] http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues#RDFa_Task_Force_Discussion_Order
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker
instance [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
[16] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa"
with screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded
in [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
[17] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases
for Ivan. [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
[18] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning
[recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
[19] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff
[recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
[20] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
[21] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa
Wiki [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
[22] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph or Steven fix the .htaccess for the XHTML
namespace [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
[23] http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
[24] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15
issue-214
<Ralph> [25]issue-214
[25] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/214
Ralph: This issue was a comment that came during the SKOS Candidate
Rec period.
... The WG decided that it was more of an editorial question for
RDFa TF to consider.
... There has been a long thread over several years, Ben's aware of
the thread...
Ralph: We should consider providing community advice in the case
where the same URI might be a piece of an RDF vocabulary or a target
in an HTML document.
... In the case where the mimetype of the document is HTML, or
application/rdf+xml
... in the case of RDFa, it's not so clear that an application can
disambiguate between the two types of documents.
... You should not use the same URI for the name in an HTML document
as well as a term in an RDF vocabulary.
... People shouldn't do <p id="foo" about="#foo">
ShaneM: I disagree
... The whole point of RDFa is to embed things in this way.
... I have a URI, which is interpreted in the context of the HTTP
request header.
... A semantic web application will follow-your-nose that should
take you to the definition of a vocabulary item.
... I'm going to prefer xml+rdf
... from a content negotiation perspective, the server should send
back what the requester wants.
... If the request is rdf+xml, then it should extract the triples
from the XHTML document and send those back as rdf+xml.
Ralph: Interesting point.
... The old advice might not matter as much anymore?
... Eric Prudhommeaux might have something to say about this.
Ralph: there might be use cases where the subject of a triple might
well want to be a particular bit of HTML markup
Manu: might be something to handle in a validator
Manu: people might do id='foo' and about='foo' when they're doing
vocabulary authoring
... it's nice to be able to drop a vocabulary term into a Web
browser and see a document
Ralph: How can we say something about the ID "foo" <p id="foo"
about="#foo"> and not the about="#foo"
Shane: and XML requires something of type ID in order for the
fragment to be valie
... in general, id='foo' about='foo' always occurs when you want to
bind triples to a block in a document
... particularly in definitions of terms
... when referring to a local definition of a term you'd have an ID
and you'd bind to it using @about
... you might also refer to it in @resource
Manu: maybe we should create a Wiki page and develop a best practice
in this area
ACTION: Manu create a wiki page for discussion of issue-214
[recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
Copyright for W3C Test Suites
Shane: looking for advice on what are acceptable test suite
copyrights
Manu: specifically, is the MIT license sufficient?
ACTION: Ralph find the statement on test suite copyright [recorded
in [27]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
<rubys> in general, MIT licensed code can be pulled into almost any
codebase; the reverse is not necessarily true
Discussion order for HTML+RDFa issues
<msporny>
[28]http://rdfa.info/wiki/rdfa-in-html-issues#RDFa_Task_Force_Discus
sion_Order
[28] http://rdfa.info/wiki/rdfa-in-html-issues#RDFa_Task_Force_Discussion_Order
Manu: I'd taken action to propose a discussion order
Sam: suggest moving " Requirement: RDFa signalling mechanism for
XHTML+RDFa, HTML+RDFa, and how does mime-type affect that
mechanism?" higher
... figure out what the signalling mechanism is
... html served as text/xml is interpreted differently by different
browsers
Manu: propose to move the signalling discussion after "target of
RDFa processing rules" and before "Do we need to cut features from
RDFa to support HTML+RDFa?"
Shane: fine with me
... some of these items have been raised in email but I'm not
persuaded they're really issues
Manu: so move "RDFa signalling mechanism" to 2nd position
Ralph: ok with me
<rubys> if they aren't really issues, they should be able to be
disposed of quickly.
Start "Target of RDFa Processing Rules" discussion
<msporny>
[29]http://rdfa.info/wiki/rdfa-in-html-issues#The_target_of_RDFa_pro
cessing_rules
[29] http://rdfa.info/wiki/rdfa-in-html-issues#The_target_of_RDFa_processing_rules
Manu: question is "on what do the RDFa processing rules operate?"
... e.g. on a DOM structure [or not]
... now we're trying to explain how this works across all languages
... and generate the same triples across all document [types]
... gets tricky when accounting for serialization issues
... goal is to find a set of rules that works on a parse tree or an
abstract syntax tree rather than on a DOM
... so define the rules in a way not based on serialization of a
specific language
Shane: Mark has a clever way of thinking about this
... and is very persuasive :)
... as I understand it, Mark's model is that RDFa is at the
application layer so whatever the underlying layer provides to the
application is what should be worked on
... this solves the RDFa specification problem but doesn't solve the
"I want the same triples when I give the same document content to
different things"
... I don't see how we can control the structure of the _input_ to
RDFa in a meaningful way
... will happen differently in legacy browsers, HTML5, new browsers,
etc.
... I'm not optimistic that we'll find a way to guarantee the same
triples everywhere
Sam: if we can find a subset that _does_ give the same triples and
note the other cases with a recommendation not to to those
... can't assume that the consumer respects the well-formed input
requirement
... this requirement is routinely ignored
Shane: ignored by user agents but not by tool chain processors
Sam: wise to accept that some people will be processing this in
browsers and give advice on what won't work there
Shane: I do think we can restrict the language so that it has more
predictable behaviours under different processing models
Sam: e.g. if a single document has two names that differ only in
case, that's probably wierd and don't do it
Shane: yep, we just never considered that case in our prior
discussions
Manu: the test cases put on the mailing list are really good
starting points
... we should be clear about what model the RDFa rules are operating
on but I do not see a reason to strip out any rules
... Mark's position is that we can't control the input to the RDFa
processing rules
... we can't control how things get put into a DOM; that's in the
domain of the HTML WG
... so the RDFa processing rules ought to be restated in terms of
_some_ incoming model
... RDFa might be used in something that has nothing to do with a
DOM
... not a good idea to restrict RDFa to just a DOM
... if you run an HTML document through two different processors,
one producing a DOM and the other not then I don't see how we can
guarantee in all cases to produce the same triples
<rubys> I agree with DOM as the answer to question #1... the problem
is that Drupal is producing content with RDFa, and depending on the
user agent, it may be processed differently. If you look at
Phillip's tests there will be cases where they answers will differ,
and some of these can't be solved. In some cases, the answer may be
"don't do that". Example: if you define an XML literal and serve the
content as text/html, be sure that you don't define any content that
HTML5 processing rules will reorder or change in a way that can't be
addressed by the parser.
Manu: they _might_ be the same in some cases but I don't think we
should try to guarantee the same triples in all cases
Shane: from personal experience, some of our tests produced foreign
elements that were removed from the DOM tree I was handed
Shane: I don't have control over this; I can only work on what I'm
handed
Manu: can we come up with an example that shows how a well-formed
document would generate different triples?
Shane: comes up when embedding foreign stuff, e.g. SVG -- the SVG
simply doesn't show up in the DOM
... there could be RDFa annotations on the SVG but I've lost them
<msporny> Thanks for joining us Sam :)
<msporny> and for your input.
Shane: the XML literal case may well be the most glaring example
... there are several ways to address this and I don't have a strong
preference for which we pick
... I sort-of like Mark's suggestion to change the default to not be
an XML literal
... so you'd only produce an XML literal in a triple when you
explicitly ask for one
Manu: the side-effect of making it not automatically an XML literal
is that it will process the content
... e.g. <spam about='foo'> inside the content would cause triples
to be generated
Shane: that's probably a corner case
... easier to change behavior sooner than later
Manu: the reason for a change is to make XML literals the same
between HTML and XHTML
... but there's a parallel discussion suggesting that it may be OK
for the triples to differ given different input
Shane: the core issue here is whether it makes any sense to generate
XML literals in a non-XML context
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Manu create a wiki page for discussion of issue-214
[recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
[NEW] ACTION: Ralph find the statement on test suite copyright
[recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/04-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ben to author wiki page with charter template for
RDFa IG. Manu to provide support where needed. [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ben to put up information on "how to write RDFa"
with screencast possibly and instructions on bookmarklet. [recorded
in [33]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
[PENDING] ACTION: Manu to write summary for Semantic Web Use Cases
for Ivan. [recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09]
[PENDING] ACTION: Mark create base wizard suitable for cloning
[recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
[PENDING] ACTION: Mark to send Ben ubiquity related wizard stuff
[recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
[PENDING] ACTION: Mark write foaf examples for wiki [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13]
[PENDING] ACTION: Michael to create 'RDFa for uF users' on RDFa Wiki
[recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph make a request for an RDFa issue tracker
instance [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph or Steven fix the .htaccess for the XHTML
namespace [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph think about RSS+RDFa [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15]
[32] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action10
[33] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
[34] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action09
[35] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
[36] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
[37] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action13
[38] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action14
[39] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action11
[40] http://www.w3.org/2009/01/08-rdfa-minutes.html#action01
[41] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/11-rdfa-minutes.html#action15
[DONE] ACTION: Manu to go through and categorize issues and
requirements that we should address going forward. [recorded in
[42]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action12]
[42] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-rdfa-minutes.html#action12
[End of minutes]
_____________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [43]scribe.perl version 1.135
([44]CVS log)
$Date: 2009/06/04 18:14:03 $
[43] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[44] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2009 18:16:15 UTC